I no longer rely that much in reviews tbh I'm sure this game will be more than fun. Mark the scores by each and every listed reviewer here and compare it to the praising high score a $#@!ty game like COD Ghosts will get, then you'll know if you can trust the reviews.

Perhaps that's because COD & Battlefield's multiplayer is just better than Killzone's? I don't want to be too critical of the critics (lol) unless I played all three games.

I agree. I'm not saying KZ can't be a above average game. I haven't played it yet so I can't say. But I'll leave the discussion alone because I don't want this to turn into a comparison thread. Looking forward to playing KZ.

The faults seem to rely on it being 'just another shooter, albeit more pretty'. I can't blame any reviewer for that because it's something I'm inclined to agree with; the shooter genre is stagnated, and gorgeous graphics alone shouldn't hold up a game. It sounds like certain aspects of the game have been improved over its predecessors, but it just wasn't enough to set it to a higher elevation. Multiplayer isn't as tight as it probably should be.

Originally Posted by Ixion

Perhaps that's because COD & Battlefield's multiplayer is just better than Killzone's? I don't want to be too critical of the critics (lol) unless I played all three games.

Well, Battlefield's multiplayer is really in its own playing field. It's so far beyond Killzone's and Call of Duty's that it'll naturally get rated higher. Call of Duty has received bull$#@! passes these years because it's Call of Duty, but finally with CoD: Ghosts that seems to be changing some. Killzone has neither of those privileges.

Exactly, why not wait for the servers judge full game? Are they in that much of a rush for clicks?

Imagine they scored COD or BF4 just based on the SP. MP is the meat and potatoes, KZ2 + KZ3 I only attempted the SP after 2 months of owning them after diving into the MP first. Baptism of fire, 10 deaths in the first 10 minutes.

Exactly, why not wait for the servers judge full game? Are they in that much of a rush for clicks?

Imagine they scored COD or BF4 just based on the SP. MP is the meat and potatoes, KZ2 + KZ3 I only attempted the SP after 2 months of owning them after diving into the MP first. Baptism of fire, 10 deaths in the first 10 minutes.

Honestly Sessler review is very positive for me. But from it i see that next KZ can use Crysis formula. Im not a Crysis fan, but I think fps games sould take a step away from current corridor meta and give players more freedom.

I'm tired of games getting knocked just for being in the same time period as other games or for having the same mechanics as other games in the genre. Why do these reviewers think first person shooters have to be nothing like any other first person shooter that has ever come before it to make a good game? I don't see movie reviews knocking down a comedy because there were jokes like other comedies. Get over yourselves. Anyway, here's two videos from gametrailers.com that you guys might like.

I only say that because Guerilla has done this sci-fi $#@! for years with Killzone, and they've not been all that successful in getting traction behind it.

Their Sci-Fi has been incredibly dull, void of vibrancy and life...boring. I just feel like a sci-fi RPG would just be like Killzone except in third person, with a few more menus and visible stats.

just read this:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=517012
They capable create great universe, BUT they need someone who can tell the story in the right way, thats it. Maybe they should cooperate with ND or SM, I dont know, but this is the only weak point of GG

The way they've crafted their universe is just not all that exciting. So its design decisions as well.

Again, it takes place in space, far future, yet these worlds are so empty and lifeless. Even Vekta which is supposedly beautiful. Where's the native wildlife and stuff? Their guns are boring too, its a future flung story, yet they are still far too familiar feeling and looking to modern weaponry accept for one or two exceptions.

It just seems they are more concerned about making it a gritty, realistic futuristic story than making it lush, varied, and more appealing to the imagination.

Not surprised by the scores. Not like launch titles are ever AAA. One thing to remember though, for a launch title, bad reviews of a game like KZ are going to get a lot more hits than the good reviews.

The way they've crafted their universe is just not all that exciting. So its design decisions as well.

Again, it takes place in space, far future, yet these worlds are so empty and lifeless. Even Vekta which is supposedly beautiful. Where's the native wildlife and stuff? Their guns are boring too, its a future flung story, yet they are still far too familiar feeling and looking to modern weaponry accept for one or two exceptions.

It just seems they are more concerned about making it a gritty, realistic futuristic story than making it lush, varied, and more appealing to the imagination.

I understand. But now i have a question have you saw many native wildlife in Doom, Quake, Unreal, Half-Life, Halo, SystemShock or even Dark Forces and Jedi Outcast/Academy?I hope that you will not argue that last 3 have awesome universe. You judge fps game with rpg standarts.

Posting Permissions

PlayStation Universe

Copyright 2006-2014 7578768 Canada Inc. All Right Reserved.

Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written
permission of Abstract Holdings International Ltd. prohibited.Use of this site is governed
by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.